Habitat Patch Use by Fishers in the Deciduous Forest-Dominated Landscape of the Central Appalachian Mountains, USA

Abstract

Fishers (Pekania pennanti) are often associated with the coniferous and mixed forests of the northern United States and central Canada, and their ecology has been studied extensively in portions of their distributional range. Recently, natural range expansion and reintroductions have led to recolonization by fishers to portions of the central Appalachian Mountains, where deciduous forest is the dominant vegetation type. We used noninvasive hair-snare surveys and microsatellite genetic analysis to detect fishers in the central Appalachian Mountains of Pennsylvania. We used these detections within an occupancy modeling framework to explore habitat patch use by fishers and the forest characteristics and land use features that influenced it. We found that the likelihood of patch use by fishers was related to forests with higher proportions of low-density residential areas. Our results also suggested that lower road densities might be related to higher likelihood of fisher patch use. Fishers in Pennsylvania tolerated some forms of land development. Patch use was not driven by forest type or canopy cover, at least within our deciduous forest-dominated study areas. Future research identifying threshold values at which forest cover and land development affect patch use by fishers in the central Appalachian Mountains will better inform management decisions with respect to sites for future reintroduction of fishers.

Tayra (Eira barbara) landscape use as a function of cover types, forest protection, and the presence of puma and free‐ranging dogs

“…The strong association between fisher and forest fragment size, forest density, or the presence of large or old trees may be in part a function of the need for physical structure for reproductive dens with small entries to prevent entry and predation by larger males (Blomdahl et al, 2019;Ellington et al, 2017;Green et al, 2019).…”

“…Fishers tend to select home ranges and resting sites in areas of complex forest structure that provide sufficient prey, escape cover, and suitable microstructures for reproduction and resting (Green et al, 2019; Matthews et al, 2019; Zielinski et al, 2013). The strong association between fisher and forest fragment size, forest density, or the presence of large or old trees may be in part a function of the need for physical structure for reproductive dens with small entries to prevent entry and predation by larger males (Blomdahl et al, 2019; Ellington et al, 2017; Green et al, 2019). Thus, while the reproductive ecology of tayra is poorly known, a reliance of forested habitats might be expected when viewed in a phylogenetic context.…”

Estimating distribution and connectivity of recolonizing American marten in the northeastern United States using expert elicitation techniques

“…While one of the top 339 models demonstrated this relationship in our study area, the association of occupancy with 340 overall canopy cover (regardless of forest type) in other top models suggests that martens also 341 use mixed and deciduous forest types in our study area. This may be due to availability, as the 342 study area overlays the interface of sub-boreal and northern hardwood habitat types (Foster et al mustelids persist in irregular, suboptimal, or fragmented habitats (see Margey, Helder and Roeder 2010;Ellington et al 2017). Populations on the periphery of a species' distribution may have increased conservation value due to their adaptations to irregular habitats (Lesica and Allendorf 1993;Hoffman and Blows 1994;Channell and Lomolino 2000).…”

Habitat selection and spatiotemporal interactions of a reintroduced mesocarnivore

“…Sauder and Rachlow () similarly reported that home ranges of fishers in Idaho contained forest stand edges and closed canopy forest, and Facka () reported that fishers could persist and reproduce on a managed forest landscape. Recent research on fishers in eastern North America has also reported that home ranges of some fishers incorporate edges, including semiurban areas, where prey may be particularly abundant (Lapoint , Scharf et al , Ellington et al ). The growing evidence that fishers use edges, both forest and semiurban, suggests that they are more flexible in their habitat needs than previously thought.…”